The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1887-11-18
I'm the Common Pleas of coiumbss .
County.
REv. J. II. NRIMAN Rr. AL vs.. RRv. O. b.
DRouANT Rr. AL.
zarr and Buckalew for Plaintiffs, Yocum
and Freeze for Defendants.
OPINION or TIE oonpr.

The prayer is for decree, to the effect,
that they be allowed to occupy the church
Tor that purpose on every Sunday in the
year. The answer of the defendant denies
the right Of the plaintiff to hold Sunday |
school In said building at any time, and |
specially on Sundays when the German
Reformed congregation have the right, as
hereinafter mentioned, to hold service in
the church building.
The facts found by the master from the
evidence, condensed, are substantially as
follows; During period of sixty eight
years, from 1917 to the time Of filing this
bill, the Lutheran congregation of Numedla
and vicinity, represented by the plaintiffs,
and the German Reformed congregation Of
the same place represented here by the
defendants, have alternately held congre-
gational meetings for worship in a build
ing jointly erected by them on land pur-
chased and held by trustees for the use OF
these congregations These churches dur
lug all this time have been, and are now,
separate and distinct religious denomin
ations, having different church govern
ment aud owing allegiance to different
supreme ecclesiastical heads. Unwisely, as
all experience has shown such unions to be,
they agreed by articles bearing date the 9th
day of July 1916 to unite in the erection of
building for their joint use to be called
st. Paurs Church. The instrument by
p hiph tho ,,ptnn aI Il aptitlaJ
"Church Declarations, together with those
privileges and church regulations of the
joint congregation of the Evangelical
Lutheran and Evangelical Reformed High
German st. Paurs church, Columbia
county Rosringcreek township, containing
the fundamental principle Of their union
in regard to their hours OF divine porship"
In the body OF the agreement, sundry mat
ters in respect to church affairs are cou.
tanned, but the only declaration or regua-
ton in regard to the use Of the church, is
contained in the 14th and 10Th articles, in
these words: at shall be clearly under
stood in both congregations that where two
preachers shall stand connected with the
church, they shall, when possible, hold
divine service fourteen days from each 9th.
er. Should it so happen that they shall
come together on the same day to hold
divine service, he shall hold first who first an
nounced." "Should there be in the church
two funerals at the same time, the one
who died first shall be buried first without
regard to persons"
Under this agreement th, Sc congrega
tions had equal rights to the use Of the
church building for the purposes for which
it was erected. What these purposes were
pact, as construed and acted upon by the
founders and their successors during the
great number Of years preceding the recent
unpleasant and unfortunate controversy
In the articles two purposes only are speci
fed for which the building WAS to be used
to-wit: preaching and funerals. Accord
ing to the rule of logic the naming of thest
purposes precludes the idea that other ser
vices were to be held in the building If
however, other services had been held a,
irregular periods, and without regard tt
alienation between the churches, or, ever
if Sunday schools had been held for Ions
period of years in the church building /
might fairly be presumed that such use wa
in accordance with the understanding a
being embraced by the term 'divine ser
vice" So, on the other hand, the build
ings erected by the congregation for wor
ship not having been used during a periot
of more than three score years for an,
other purpose than those specially men
toned, there arises a strong, If not con
elusive presumption, that by the term divin
worship, was meant congregational worshi
and not the instruction of children.
The Master reports, and in this is sus
tanned by the evidence, that the building
erected in 1Sl7 and that erected in 1871
both under the agreement stated, wer
used by the congregations on alternat
Sundays, down to 1870, each having preach
ing every four weeks, and after that tim
each having preaching every two weeks
and that the times of each were establishe
by common consent.
From 1877 to 1888 no Sunday schoC
was held in st. Paul's church by either c
these congregations. In 1877 on two or thre
Sundays mission school was held but b
whom held and why discontinued, does nC
appear in the evidence The finding the
is, that for sxtv-six years. no Sunda
school was held in the church by eitht
congregation.
In case of long continued user, court
will presume everything consistent wit
the user. Continued acquiescence by a
parties concerned for slime whereof IL
memory of man runneth not to the col
trary," cannot be nationally accounted fC
otherwise than by presumption that IL
user was according 20 contract, unde
standing or grant, proof of which cann'
be made otherwise, because OF the antiquii
of the transaction. 1t is on this groun'
, that after a great lapse of time, grants fro
i. the state, surrender of charters, and u
, like, are presumed. In the case of Ba
nett vs. Paine Z Watts 334 to sustain us'
by prothonotary to make certain certifca
es, the Court held, that because OF the lor
continued practice, they would pFesun
that it began under a statute not to
found,
In Gass' Appeal, 70 St. Rep. 80 it wi
held. that the understanding OF the parti
evidenced by user and verbal testimon
should control in case like the prssen
although the term "liyine service" in i
broadest sense might include Sgnds
school. II was there held that the sigui
cation of that term should be confined
the sense in which the congregation unde
stood II when they entered into the sgre
ment and afterwards practiced uuder
In that case, the facts were, that the chur'
was erected in lS4S under articles of unit
: similar 10 those 10 this case. The Cou
below held that i'pivine Service" includ
Sunday schools. There Was teslimor
that Sunday schools were embraced In Il
term, and there was testimony that tn
I. were not il was held, that however th
might be that the uBderstR nding of the pa
ties must control, and the user or saith
non user of the building for Sunday schoc
was considered as an important element
| oooa.,ainino what waa the undarstandin n